Rightmove says searches for pet-friendly rental homes fell 54% in May and 52% in June compared with the same months a year earlier, suggesting tenants are changing how they approach landlords after the Renters’ Rights Act came into force.
The drop does not point to weaker demand from pet owners. Instead, it suggests more renters now believe they can ask for permission later rather than restricting their search to listings already marked as pet-friendly.
For landlords, that matters now because pet requests may be arriving later in the lettings process, or even after a tenancy starts. That changes how landlords need to handle referencing, inventory checks, insurance and communication before keys are handed over.
Rightmove data points to later pet conversations
According to Rightmove’s latest analysis, the sharper falls came after the Renters’ Rights Act took effect on 1 May. The law gives tenants the right to make a reasonable pet request and prevents landlords from refusing it unreasonably.
Colleen Babcock, property expert at Rightmove, said the trend looked less like falling demand for pets and more like a change in renter behaviour once tenants felt more confident about their rights.
LandlordZone also reported agents seeing fewer tenants raise pets at the search stage and more leaving the conversation until later. That creates a practical risk for landlords who still assume a listing filter or a basic pre-tenancy question will settle the issue.
This follows Residential Landlord’s earlier coverage of the government’s updated pet request guidance, which set out how landlords should assess requests after the Act took effect. It also builds on Residential Landlord’s reporting on patchy landlord confidence around post-RRA compliance, where pets were one of several areas still causing confusion.
Landlords may need clearer pet policies before viewings
The immediate lesson is that landlords may need to decide their stance before a property is listed, not after an application lands. A vague case-by-case approach looks harder to defend if a tenant makes a formal request and the landlord has no consistent policy, insurer check or property-specific reason for saying no.
There is also a risk that some tenants will hold the conversation back until much later if they think an upfront disclosure will count against them. Landlords who want fewer disputes may need clearer questions, better written consent terms and a firmer paper trail from the start.
The core legal framework is set out in the government’s guidance on private renting with pets, which landlords should review alongside their tenancy documents and insurance cover.
Opinion
The headline is not that tenants suddenly want fewer pets in rentals. It is that the filter stage matters less once the law changes the bargaining position. Landlords who do not tighten their process now may find the first real pet discussion happens when they have much less room to manage it.
